User talk:Jane230

This is Jane230's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Irena Soprano (April 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Blaze Wolf were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The recognition section consists of severe WP:REFBOMBing. You do not need 10 individual references supporting 1 claim. Additionally, you only use the first 3 sources in the rest of the article.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Irena Soprano and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jane230! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Irena Soprano (July 15)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MurielMary was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Irena Soprano and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MurielMary (talk) 13:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Irena Soprano

Hello, Jane230. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Irena Soprano, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:05, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Irena Soprano

Hello, Jane230. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Irena Soprano".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:06, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Movavi

User:Jimfbleak Hello, you just deleted my article about Movavi. This is the company that produces Movavi Video Editor. There is information about its history here and here. There is information about the company's product here and here. Sorry, I had no advertising purposes, took the information from the company's website as well. I can only rewrite the article completely according to the sources. Jane230 (talk) 12:44, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I note that you said in the edit summary that you translated from the Russian, perhaps that should have been said on the article page too. You said I took the information from the company's website as well, hardly an independent source, as required here.

If you have a conflict of interest, you must declare it. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message. Also read the following regarding writing an article:

you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls

Most of your text was either unreferenced or sourced to press releases, not independent third-party sources.

The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:

significant coverage in
independent,
multiple,
reliable,
secondary sources.

Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability.

Your text is all about what the company organisation sells, little about the company itself other than locations. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, management structure, turnover or profits. Your text tells us nothing factual about the company, as opposed to its products, none of which appear to have Wikipedia articles themselves.

You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

Your supposed History is in fact just telling us when the products were released, I have no idea who founded the company, or where, when it expanded to other locations or anything financial.

Basically, your article was a section saying when the products were released, a comprehensive listing of the products, and awards for the products. None of the awards is linked to a Wikipedia article anyway. Whatever your intention, it's basically a shop window for their products rather than an article about the company.

There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

I didn't check.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. If you have a conflict of interest, you must disclose the nature of that COI. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jimfbleak There is no conflict of interest. The article was not written for advertising purposes. I listed the company's products and the years they were released because that is the only information from the company's history that is available on the internet. Financial performance information is available on Similar.web, but these are the metrics associated with the company's website. It talks about the history of the company, but also focuses on the release of their products.

Yes, there are no articles about the products on the English Wikipedia, but there are on the Russian Wikipedia.

No, the text is not plagiarised.

Can I remove all the information about the products (except for the release dates, because it is part of the company's history) and try to publish the article again or show it to you? The article will be written based on the sources I sent you earlier. Thank you for your help! Jane230 (talk) 07:37, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK for the financials to be sourced to the company, and there is nothing to stop you trying again with a more comprehensive view than previously Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:22, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll try to rewrite the article. Thank you! Jane230 (talk) 08:36, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jimfbleak Hello! I rewrote the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jane230/sandbox Can you chek it please? Jane230 (talk) 08:34, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some minor changes. I'm not sure whether a reviewer would be happy with some of the refs, which appear to be press releases, but i suggest that you move the page to a proper draft page and submit it for review Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:52, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Jane230 (talk) 11:07, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Skycoach for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Skycoach is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skycoach until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

~ A412 ^talk! 00:00, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Movavi (September 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by HitroMilanese was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please see WP:NCOMPANY.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Movavi and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Hitro talk 11:30, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]